Q & A

Q1. What is the way to contact the Office of Institutional Research at Hungkuang University?

Answer:
You can call 04-26318652#2383 or email ir@web.hk.edu.tw.

Q2. What is the process for applying for the data analysis request form from the Office of Institutional Research?

Answer:
From the university’s homepage→(Faculty/Staff) School System→Common System→X02 Electronic Form Approval System→Fill out the “Institutional Research Topic Application Form”→Review by the applicant’s department head→Review by the Office of Institutional Research.

Q3. What is Institutional Research?

Answer:
It involves collecting data, analyzing, reporting, and taking actions by faculty and staff to facilitate the operations and decisions of higher education institutions. Reference: Saupe and Montgomery, 1970.

Q4. Why do Institutional Research?

Answer:
It helps in making decisions for the future development of the university, based on data and research result recommendations, and planning relevant key institutional governance.

Q5. What is the origin of the Office of Institutional Research at Hungkuang University?

Answer:
Institutional Research (IR) originated in the United States. In the 1940s and 1950s, with the flourishing development of American higher education institutions, various issues related to institutional governance and management emerged. This led to the establishment of organizations for institutional research. The Ministry of Education initiated the Institutional Research Program in 2015.

Reference: Huang, W. L., & Lee, Y. Y. (2014). Strategic development of Institutional Research. Journal of Higher Education and Vocational Education, 95(1).

Q6. What are some of the prominent domestic and international associations related to Institutional Research?

Answer:

Q7. What are the strategies for promoting Institutional Research in Taiwan?

Answer:
The strategies for promoting Institutional Research in Taiwan include the establishment of specialized Institutional Research units, focusing on assessing and enhancing learning outcomes, systematic training of Institutional Research personnel, establishing inter-university alliances or professional organizations, developing a collaborative and communicative campus culture, and utilizing big data analysis from government departments for long-term tracking and analysis of students.

Reference: Li, C. H. (Director of the Division of Educational Quality and Development, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education) in Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 57.

Q8. Should the institutional research database be centrally managed or decentralized?

Answer:

This issue primarily responds to the argument for centralized database management proposed by AIR in 2016. Centralized management facilitates data administration and utilization while providing fundamental functions for data reporting and preliminary analysis. However, some researchers prefer maintaining the current decentralized database model. Beyond concerns about data security, a more critical issue is that under a centralized management approach, the structure and management of institutional research (IR) databases at different institutions may obscure the original definition and context of the data. This could lead to misinterpretation and misuse by users. Therefore, the management and utilization of institutional research databases should be appropriately adapted based on the specific circumstances of each institution.

Reference: Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 69, September 2017.

Q9. What does it mean for institutional research to be the core in achieving university self-governance?

Answer:

One of the objectives of promoting university institutional evaluations is to implement continuous self-improvement, ultimately achieving university self-governance. Institutional research is not an additional component of institutional evaluation but rather a key element that was previously overlooked in its implementation. Only by making institutional research the core of an internal self-improvement mechanism can universities establish a constructive dialogue between self-evaluation and external evaluation. This approach enables universities to genuinely practice and achieve self-governance.

Reference: Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 60, March 2016.

Q10. Who might be the decision-makers in institutional research?

Answer:

In the United States, the AIR (Association for Institutional Research) proposed three specific outcomes in its “Improvement and Transformation of Higher Education Institutional Research” initiative. One of these, the “Future Practical Statement for Institutional Research,” argued that a top-down policy and structure in institutional governance cannot ensure that information selection and execution stay on track for success. Only by expanding the participation of all stakeholders in data-driven decision-making can the quality of institutional decisions be ensured.

Therefore, in the future, institutional research should consider students, faculty, staff, and other relevant individuals as key decision-makers to ensure that institutional research successfully serves as a driver of institutional quality improvement. According to AIR’s declaration on the future trends of institutional research, it will not only provide scientific advice to senior decision-makers but also deliver scientific data to all stakeholders of the university on topics of concern, to support relevant decision-making.

Reference: Huang, Rongcun, 2017.1 Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 65.

Q11. How to use QA + IR for university governance?

Answer:

Domestic university institutional evaluations are an important mechanism for universities to assess and confirm their teaching quality, as well as a key component of Quality Assurance (QA). “Institutional governance” is a major focus of these evaluations. How to leverage the existing QA mechanisms, from the perspective of Institutional Research (IR), by utilizing years of accumulated institutional and student databases to mine and establish routine big data, in order to formulate correct institutional decision-making strategies and execution? This approach aims to adjust self-positioning, reshape organizational structures and internal control mechanisms, seek niches, and highlight distinctive features, becoming a new emerging discipline in university governance. While IR focuses on internal control, QA emphasizes external control. The effective integration of these two can help different types of universities overcome development challenges and achieve their educational goals.

Reference: Editorial Department, 2018.3 Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 72.

Q12.How is the employment status of university graduates when researching institutional research topics?

Answer:

The institutional research topic related to the employment status of university graduates can refer to the Evaluation Bimonthly, which indicates that the subjective employment status of Taiwanese university graduates shows a job satisfaction score of 3.88, a salary satisfaction score of 3.41, and a student engagement score of 3.36. In terms of objective employment status, the time spent searching for a job is 2.786 months. If 3.5 is used as the standard for satisfaction, only the job satisfaction indicator exceeds this threshold.

Reference: Zhou, Yingli, 2016, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 63.

Q13. What are the sources of funding for students when researching institutional research topics?

Answer:

The institutional research topic related to students’ sources of funding can refer to the Evaluation Bimonthly, which points out that 74.67% of students in technical and vocational colleges mainly rely on their families for support, followed by earnings from part-time jobs or work-study, then 23.87% from student loans, and finally, 6.60% from internal and external scholarships.

Reference: Zhan, Mengru, 2018, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 74.

Q14. What are the tasks included in institutional research?

Answer:

According to Howard et al. (2012), the tasks of institutional research can be divided into four main categories:

  1. Data management and technical support
  2. Data mining and analysis
  3. Research and development (including planning and projects)
  4. External and internal reporting

Reference: He, Xihui, 2015, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 57.

Q15. What are the specific tasks of institutional research?

Answer:

In the lecture on “How to Conduct Effective Institutional Research,” Professor Peng Senming discussed the specific tasks of institutional research as follows:

  1. Collecting, consolidating, interpreting, and disseminating school information
  2. Examining and reporting on the trends and changes within the institution
  3. Planning and executing diagnostic work to assess the institution’s strengths and weaknesses
  4. Reviewing and gathering information on domestic and international trends in university education development
  5. Planning and executing research on special topics and conceptualizing improvement and development plans

Reference: Peng, Senming, 2016, How to Conduct Effective Institutional Research?

Q16.What are the prerequisites for conducting effective institutional research?

Answer:

In the lecture on “How to Conduct Effective Institutional Research,” Professor Peng Senming discussed the prerequisites for conducting effective institutional research as follows:

  1. There must be attention and support from the university’s senior leadership.
  2. The team members must be able to produce high-quality research outcomes.
  3. IR personnel must adhere to professional ethics and work attitudes.
  4. A well-established institutional database must be in place.
  5. There must be advanced software and hardware for data collection, analysis, and dissemination.

Reference: Peng, Senming, 2016, How to Conduct Effective Institutional Research?

Q17. What are the current challenges faced by institutions in promoting institutional research?

Answer:

According to Wang Baojin in Evaluation Bimonthly Issue 65, the challenges encountered in promoting institutional research are as follows:

  1. Lack of clear positioning
  2. Shortage of professional personnel
  3. Weak information capabilities
  4. Insufficient data mining technical skills

Reference: Wang, Baojin, 2017, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 65.

Q18. How to use IR to transform the structure and enhance effectiveness, becoming the university’s best assistant and think tank?

Answer:

IR cannot create something out of nothing for the school, but clever educators can effectively utilize the valuable data and decision-making mechanisms provided by IR to enhance what they cannot achieve, recognize crises from safety, and identify opportunities within crises. To allow IR to start functioning as the best assistant and think tank for the university, and even contribute to the review and revision of national higher education policies, preparations should be made first. The following two points are suggested:

  1. The IR database should be customized for each institution and display different functions according to needs.
  2. Establish an IR professional association to build cross-institutional consensus and connect with international standards.

Reference: 2015.9 Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 57.

Q19. What is big data?

Answer:

The concept derived from data mining focuses not on the advancement of analytical techniques, but on the information contained within large amounts of data itself, as well as the new ways it offers for interpreting various phenomena and making predictions. The acquisition and analysis of big data bring new ways of thinking, disrupting the understanding and operational models in many fields, from e-commerce, social life, public administration, and healthcare to education and learning (Sun Yiming, 2014).

Reference: 2015.7 Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 56.

Q20. What are the six major aspects covered in institutional research?

Answer:

The institutional research report uses secondary data analysis, collecting, summarizing, organizing, and analyzing existing public data. The content covers the following six major aspects:

  1. Student Enrollment: Including information on the number of students, students on extended study, students on leave, and students who have withdrawn.
  2. Faculty and Staff Size: Including information on the number of full-time faculty, administrative staff, and student-to-faculty ratio.
  3. Academic Information Statistics: Including data on inter-college course selection, minors and double majors, English and distance learning course participation, and graduation surveys.
  4. Facility and Space Resources: Including information on campus buildings, land, library and journal resources, and student dormitories.
  5. International Connections: Including information on the number of international students, students from Hong Kong, Macau, overseas Chinese, and mainland China, study abroad and exchange programs, and the number of foreign full-time faculty.
  6. Financial Status: Including information on tuition and fee standards, financial aid for disadvantaged students, fee waivers, financial indices, private school subsidy grants, and the ratio of teaching resources funding.

Reference: Wu, Shuyuan, 2016.11 Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 64.

Q21. From the perspective of institutional research, what aspects might be covered in the integration model of student learning outcomes and student success?

Answer:

According to Chang Tongshan (2014), the institutional research decision support process, and with reference to practical experiences from foreign universities, the following aspects are specifically proposed:

  1. Direct assessment items, including various course exams/tests/qualifying exam results, English proficiency tests, certification exams, student learning portfolios, project report reviews, multiple assessment results, learning outcomes assessments, learning experience surveys, and self-assessments (attitudes, values).
  2. Surveys of related stakeholders, including employer satisfaction, alumni tracking (employment rate, salary, job positions, regional employment trends, changes in work types, alignment of education with employment, etc.).
  3. “Achievement integration model” constructed from the student’s perspective to understand the alignment between their learning process and outcomes, such as analyzing student characteristics, grouping or classifying academic performance records, tracking changes in student status, and understanding the successful learning rate.

Reference: He, Xihui, 2016.3 Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 60.

Q22. What are the main functions of institutional research?

Answer:

Currently, the general functions of institutional research typically include four main areas:

  1. Data management and technical support
  2. Providing external and internal reports
  3. Assisting with planning and decision-making
  4. Research and development

Reference: Liu, Mengqi, 2016.03, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 60.

Q23. What is the main organization of institutional research?

Answer:

Generally, an institutional research organization should have three task-oriented units, each with corresponding professional personnel:

  1. Integration of management data warehouse (information personnel)
  2. Data collection, analysis, presentation, and application (statistical analysis and research)
  3. Integration of institutional research with institutional strategy and development planning (administrative or academic leaders)

Reference: Liu, Mengqi, 2016.03, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 60.

Q24. Do Taiwan’s neighboring countries have credible institutional research organizations?

Answer:

In Japan, the university evaluation organizations recognized by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) include:

  1. NIAD-QE (National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation)
    https://www.niad.ac.jp/english/
  2. Japan Institution for Higher Education Evaluation (JIHEE)
    http://www.jihee.or.jp/en/index.html
  3. Japan University Accreditation Association (JUAA)
    https://www.juaa.or.jp/en/

Reference: Li, Yifang, 2018.07, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 74.

Q25. How does Japan’s NIAD-QE conduct institutional research evaluations for universities?

Answer:

Currently, the evaluation has reached its third cycle, with 27 criteria across 6 areas. These areas include basic organization of education and research, internal quality assurance, financial and operational management and information disclosure, facilities and student support, admission conditions, and standards for curriculum and learning outcomes.

The adjustments made to the evaluation criteria in past cycles have the following characteristics:

  1. The criteria are aligned with relevant regulations on the institutional requirements for university operations.
  2. The focus of the criteria has shifted from inputs and processes to learning outcomes, moving towards internal quality assurance functions.
  3. Revisions to the evaluation criteria and implementation methods are evidence-based.

Reference: Li, Yifang, 2018.07, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 74.

Q26. What role does a data exchange organization play in institutional research?

Answer:

Taking the United States as an example, the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) primarily provides services such as data reporting and exchange, student data verification, and academic research. Currently, the NSC collects data from 97% of enrolled college students across the U.S. and provides various educational institutions and related organizations with insights into graduate trajectories, helping universities with student data reporting and exchange, and establishing a long-term student database for tracking.

In the current stage, Taiwan’s Ministry of Education is promoting a national institutional research database, which can refer to the U.S. NSC model, but necessary adjustments should be made based on local conditions. Data collection should be phased according to different objectives. Universities should establish data alliances to encourage cross-institutional collaborations, and institutional data databases should provide incentives to encourage participation from schools at all levels.

Reference: Lin, Jinghui, Chen, Junhong, 2018.09, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 75.

Q27. What are the three highly specialized teams that make up the Institutional Research and Decision Support Office?

Answer:

  1. Decision Support Service Team
  2. Institutional Research Team
  3. Evaluation and Learning Outcomes Assessment Team

Reference: Li, Zhenghan, 2015.09, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 57.

Q28. What are the specific strategies for promoting institutional research in our country?

Answer:

  1. Establish dedicated units for institutional research
  2. Focus institutional research on learning outcomes assessment and improvement
  3. Conduct systematic training for institutional research professionals
  4. Form inter-university alliances or develop professional organizations
  5. Develop a campus culture of collaboration and communication
  6. Integrate big data analysis from government departments for long-term longitudinal tracking of students

Reference: Li, Zhenghan, 2015.09, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 57.

Q29. What are the steps for the application of the institutional research database?

Answer:

According to Tang Huici and others, the steps for conducting institutional research (IR) are as follows:

  1. Collect IR data
  2. Inventory relevant school systems
  3. Integrate data into the IR system

Reference: Tang Huici, Guo Wenxing, 2017.1, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 65.

Q30. How to establish a successful institutional research office?

Answer:

Different universities have varying views on how to establish a successful institutional research office. Vice President Li Wenlong pointed out that when developing institutional research (IR), it is essential to first understand the needs and assess available resources, such as the Teaching Excellence Program and the Model University Program. The next step is to examine how the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) of these two programs impact university development. Finally, by creating an information system through the university’s specialized departments and adding analytical tools, a successful IR office can be established.

Reference: Tang Hui-ci, Guo Wen-xing, January 2017, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 65.

Q31. How does the institutional research office obtain data through cross-departmental collaboration within the university organization?

Answer:

In the article “A New Vision for Institutional Research” (2016), Randy Swing, the former Executive Director of the American Association for Institutional Research (AIR), and Leah Ross, the Senior Director of Research and Development, categorized the operational models of institutional research offices as follows:

  1. Centralized Institutional Research Model: The institutional research office serves as the central point, providing analytical results to other units within the university.
  2. Networked Institutional Research Model: The institutional research office establishes a shared network relationship with other units on campus. These units can provide institutional data to the research office, as well as to other units for data integration and analysis.
  3. Matrixed Institutional Research Model: The institutional research office has a Chief Institutional Research Officer (CIRO). However, this model is not widely adopted in the U.S. as it could lead to overly centralized power, which may not be conducive to the development of institutional research.
  4. Decentralized Institutional Research Model: The institutional research office provides structural support and cultivates managers who interact with key data. In this model, the research office is no longer the core of data collection and analysis, but each unit serves as a point of data collection and analysis.

Reference: Huang, Shuling & Huang, Xinjia, 2018, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 71.

Q32. What are the key success factors for effective institutional management?

Answer:

The Taiwan Assessment Association, through the “TWAEA 2018 Freshman Learning Adaptation Survey,” along with the rich data modeling experience of the institutional data science team, has summarized the key success factors required for precise institutional management. These factors are divided into three main areas:

  1. Institutional Knowledge: The understanding and grasp of various institutional affairs, such as student records, research variables, and faculty/staff status. This aspect is the most implicit yet crucial of the three factors, including teacher-student interactions, the financial status of institutional operations, and the control of institutional data.
  2. Statistical Analysis: This includes knowledge and practical skills in social science research tools and mainstream statistical tools, such as research design, data collection, visualization, and both qualitative and quantitative research methods.
  3. Information Technology: This involves understanding and managing institutional information systems and databases, such as the data structure of student information systems and the construction and user-friendliness of various survey platforms.

Reference: Zhong Hao-xuan, Evaluation Bi-monthly, Issue 75.

Q33. What are the innovative teaching methods within the scope of institutional research? (Case sharing)

Answer:

Teaching innovation refers to introducing new teaching concepts, methods, strategies, or tools for instruction.

Professor Fu Haozheng from the Department of Philosophy at Chinese Culture University once said, “Through philosophical education, guide students to understand the importance of ‘thinking’ from life, cultivate logical thinking abilities, and learn to see the world around us with a humble attitude.” He also shared five innovative teaching strategies implemented in the classroom:

  1. Use real-life examples to explain complex logical theories: The difference between opposing viewpoints often lies not in who is right or wrong, but in the different ways of thinking. The aim is to teach students the ability of “perspective-taking” through logical thinking courses.
  2. Require handwritten notes to deepen learning impressions: Nowadays, many college students replace writing down content from the board with taking photos on their phones. While it’s quick and easy, this process loses the opportunity for organizing the content and engaging in thoughtful reflection.
  3. Open book exams to cultivate logical thinking: Logical thinking should be about integration and flexible application, not relying on rote memorization for scoring.
  4. Cultivate students’ dialectical thinking skills: Using group discussions, students write their arguments on the blackboard and engage in classroom discussions. This approach breaks the tradition of the teacher performing a monologue and allows students to participate in dialectical reasoning, sparking more classroom dialogue and ideas.
  5. Design “bonus cards” to encourage students to speak up: Encourage students to raise their hands and express their opinions during class. Regardless of whether the answer is correct, students who speak up at least once each week will have the chance to earn extra credit, motivating them to actively participate and improve their communication skills, fostering positive interaction between students and the teacher.

Reference: Zhang Wenhua, May 2018, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 73.

Q34. What are the practical follow-up recommendations for implementing institutional research in Taiwan?

Answer:

In 2017, TAIR conducted a nationwide survey of 146 institutions to examine the operation of institutional research offices in Taiwan. The results indicated that 76 universities or colleges in Taiwan have established institutional research offices or similar dedicated units. Based on the survey, several key recommendations for the future promotion of institutional research were made:

◊Build a national educational data database, providing a one-stop data analysis platform.

◊Move from data analysis to issue perception and context understanding.

◊Strengthen issue perception capabilities to address future challenges.

◊Enhance the ability to grasp context and improve connections with the external environment.

◊Systematic interviews and qualitative research methods are useful tools for institutional research analysts.

◊Go beyond data analysis and actively participate in the daily work of relevant functional departments.

Reference: Fu, Y. Z. (2018.3). Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 72.

Q35. What is the major mission of the institutional research center?

Answer:

With the rapid changes in the higher education environment, universities are facing challenges such as international competition and the issue of declining birth rates. Through a decision support model based on objective data, the institutional research center plays a major role in guiding the future direction of universities. Higher education institutions should clarify the positioning of their institutional research centers, recruit and train professional staff, and establish mechanisms for feedback from institutional research to administration. This will maximize the potential and application of institutional research, helping universities face challenges and achieve sustainable development in their operations.

Reference: Lin, J. H., & Chen, J. H. (Assistant Researcher, National Sun Yat-sen University Institutional Research Office), 2017.9, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 69.

Q36. In light of the current state of institutional research in Taiwan, aside from maintaining strengths in teaching evaluation and performance, what other areas can be strengthened?

Answer:

According to the suggestions from Director Yang Faxian of the Institutional Research and Analysis Office at the University of South Carolina, the areas that can be strengthened include the following:

  1. Strengthen inter-institutional alliances to enhance data collection, storage, and analysis capabilities.
  2. Recruit programmers or data scientists to transform raw data into useful information.
  3. Interpret the information into knowledge that is actionable for leadership.

Reference: Yang Faxian, March 2018, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 72.

Q37. What are the future prospects of institutional research?

Answer:

Institutional research in the United States has a history of over half a century, while Taiwan’s institutional research is still in its early stages. With support from decision-making levels and by learning from both domestic and international higher education institutions, it has been able to progress smoothly. In the future, it will continue to deepen and improve its operational mechanisms, including:

  1. Establishing a professional training mechanism for personnel
  2. Enhancing the capacity of key members to use smart platforms
  3. Combining in-depth plans to assess the effectiveness of implementation

Reference:2018, Hsiao Hsiang-wen, Evaluation Bi-monthly, Issue 72

Q38. How can the university promote a culture and knowledge of institutional research internally?

Answer:

To enhance the knowledge of institutional research among administrators, faculty, and staff, Shih Hsin University has established a culture of institutional research on campus. The main promotional strategies include:

  1. Encouraging faculty participation
  2. Publishing newsletters
  3. Enhancing the professional knowledge of institutional research staff
  4. Forming long-term alliances for observation and learning

Reference: 2018, Xiao Xiangwen, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 72.

Q39.How should the government assist higher education institutions in promoting institutional research?

Answer:

For example, in the process of promoting institutional research, the U.S. Department of Education, through its National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), has played a significant role.

Following the principle of the Department of Education’s responsibility for research, funding grants, and policy guidance, NCES collaborates with the Association for Institutional Research (AIR) and the State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO) to provide various services and guidance to schools. These services include promoting the establishment of institutional research databases, assisting schools in effectively utilizing national data, supporting the professional development of institutional researchers, and helping to develop training programs for institutional research professionals.

Reference: Peng Senming, 2015, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 57

Q40. How can the security of the institutional database be effectively protected?

Answer:

Taking Taipei Medical University as an example, the university established the “Institutional Research Database Management Regulations” and the “Institutional Research Database Application and Usage Guidelines” in the 104th academic year. It also set up the “Taipei Medical University Data Analysis Center.” Applicants who wish to use the database must visit the Data Analysis Center to access the database through a connection. When users leave, only aggregated statistical data can be taken out, not individual data formats. The data must be reviewed before it can be taken out. This is primarily to protect data security and personal privacy, and it serves as the foundation for the use of the database.

Reference: 2018.1, Shih Chun-Ming, Chen Jin-Hua, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 71

Q41. What is the current situation of faculty evaluation in universities in our country?

Answer:

The main evaluation target is full-time faculty, with most universities using a scoring system. Public universities typically implement faculty evaluations every three years, while private universities tend to conduct them annually. The evaluation responsibility mainly lies with the “Faculty Evaluation Committee,” and 70% of schools require teachers to pass the evaluation in order to be eligible for promotion.

Faculty evaluation should not be solely based on faculty appointments but should aim to promote professional growth and development. Universities should establish reward systems to encourage continuous improvement. Additionally, providing systematic and concrete feedback to teachers after evaluations can help improve teaching quality and promote university governance.

Reference: Chen Meihua, Yang Ying, 2018.05, Evaluation Bi-monthly, Issue 73.

Q42. How does institutional research reflect a university’s social responsibility?

Answer:

According to scholar Fu Yuan-zhi, “social mobility rate” is one of the key indicators to measure a university’s social responsibility.

For example, at California State University, Los Angeles, 9.9% of students’ parents fall into the bottom 5% of income earners, but by the time of graduation, the students’ personal income places them in the top 5%, demonstrating the university’s contribution to facilitating social mobility for students.

The University of California’s annual performance report also uses this concept to showcase its social responsibility in education. The report highlights that 42% of undergraduates come from low-income families where neither parent holds a college degree. Through various subsidies, these students have similar graduation rates after six years compared to other students, and their post-graduation income exceeds that of their families.

Drawing on the experience of U.S. universities provides valuable insights for advancing institutional research and implementing university governance in Taiwan.

Reference: Fu Yuan-zhi, 2017.09, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 69

Q43. What is the value of campus data in institutional decision-making?

Answer:

According to scholar Hu Yongxiang, based on the public availability of institutional data, the strategy of assisting internal departments in decision-making and documenting this process has the following values:

  1. It provides rational decision-making basis for changes in school policies or resource allocation.
  2. It ensures continuity in routine administrative decisions while reducing administrative burdens.
  3. It helps in developing successful cases based on IR-centered policy implementation records.

Reference: Hu Yongxiang, 2017.5, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 67.

Q44. How to assess college students’ learning experiences through learning outcomes evaluation?

Answer:

Taking National Sun Yat-sen University as an example, in the 102nd academic year, the “College Student Learning Outcomes Assessment” (COLA) long-term tracking database was established. The focus of the survey topics and framework is on college students’ learning experiences, learning strategies and motivation, physical and mental development adaptation, learning process, employability, and the connection to employment market performance. This systematically collects data and strengthens the subsequent student learning support mechanism.

Data collection for students in their first to fourth years is conducted annually. In addition to the surveys conducted during their studies, they are also followed for three years after graduation. This is aimed at improving teaching quality and enhancing learning outcomes, while providing various information needed for external evaluations and on-site visits.

Reference: March 2017, Shi Qinglin, Lin Jinghui, Chen Junhong, Evaluation Bimonthly, Issue 66.

Q45. What is the relationship between university governance and financial surplus?

Answer:

According to the research by scholar Hsiao Yu-chen, using data from universities between 2012 and 2014, the results of the cross-analysis of financial average surplus and institutional evaluation are as follows:

  1. Northern universities have the highest number and ratio of financial surplus.
  2. Central universities have the highest ratio of passing evaluations.
  3. Universities with student populations between 5,001-10,000 have the highest number and ratio of financial surplus; however, universities with over 10,001 students have the highest ratio of passing evaluations.
  4. Universities with operational costs below 100,000 have a higher number and ratio of financial surplus, as well as a higher evaluation passing rate. This is a very interesting topic that warrants further investigation.
  5. There is no significant relationship between whether a university is a “teaching excellence” institution (including top universities) and its financial surplus, but it is related to the evaluation passing rate. “Teaching excellence” universities (including top universities) have a passing rate that is 33% higher than that of non-teaching excellence universities.
  6. Universities founded 26-50 years ago have the highest number and ratio of financial surplus, while those founded over 50 years ago have the best evaluation passing rate.
  7. The results show that universities with medium-sized student populations (5,001-10,000), operational costs below 100,000, and founded 26-50 years ago perform better in financial surplus. There is no significant relationship with institutional evaluations, which deserves further exploration.

The above research results can serve as a reference for university administrative offices, which can conduct more in-depth studies on the financial status and governance of universities in the future.

Reference: Hsiao Yu-chen, September 2016, Evaluation Bi-monthly Issue 63

Q46. How to enhance institutional management expertise?

Answer:

Since 2015, to align with the Ministry of Education’s efforts to enhance institutional management capabilities and establish the Institutional Research (IR) system, universities have gradually set up institutional research units. Shih Hsin University, in order to establish a culture of institutional research within the university, has adopted strategies including encouraging faculty participation, issuing newsletters, enhancing the professional knowledge of institutional research personnel, and establishing long-term alliances for learning and observation.

In the three years of promoting institutional research at Shih Hsin University, while the development of institutional research in Taiwan is just beginning, compared to the over half-century history of institutional research in the U.S., the university has been able to make steady progress with the support of decision-making levels and by learning from the experiences of domestic and international higher education institutions. Moving forward, the university will continue to develop professional talents. According to scholar Li Zhenghan (2015), researchers in institutional research must possess three types of intelligence:

  1. Technical and Analytical Skills: Familiarity with computer software or related analytical techniques.
  2. Issue Intelligence: An understanding of key issues in higher education.
  3. Contextual Intelligence: Understanding organizational operations and respecting diverse perspectives.

Based on the above, Shih Hsin University can follow this approach to train staff’s professional capabilities, enhance their understanding of higher education issues, and establish a sound mechanism to improve the professional image and capabilities of institutional research.

Reference: Xiao Xiangwen, 2018.3, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 72.

Q47. How to use the national institutional database to enhance the performance of institutional governance?

Answer:
In 1993, the United States established the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC), which provides services including data reporting and exchange, student data verification, and academic research. It helps colleges and universities transition from manual records to automated systems, improving administrative efficiency and student satisfaction with their institutions.

To add value to higher education decision-making, NSC collaborates with institutions to establish automated systems. It now provides services such as student enrollment certification, degree verification, and transcript requests. Students can apply online to obtain relevant data. Additionally, NSC offers convenience in tracking nationwide high school graduates, significantly aiding the evaluation of student learning outcomes.

In 2010, NSC collaborated with the Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research on national student registration analysis, transfer trends analysis, and enrollment prediction analysis. The center collects data at the national student level and builds a large, long-term student database for tracking. This helps universities in student data reporting and exchange, providing more precise information for analysis and offering valuable references for institutional decision-making.

In the future, our university may consider collaborating with other higher education institutions to follow the example of the U.S. National Student Clearinghouse and establish a national institutional research database to enhance the performance of institutional governance.

Reference: 2018.9, Lin Jinghui, Chen Junhong, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 75.

Q48. How can the expectations for improving student satisfaction with the school be effectively raised?

Answer:

In order to improve student satisfaction, schools often focus on enhancing facilities, administration, housing, and other aspects that are important to students. The Taiwan Evaluation Association (台評會) pointed out, “Most people tend to conduct satisfaction surveys for students and improve areas with low scores.” However, “satisfaction” only provides information on the current level of satisfaction and does not reveal students’ future expectations for university resources.

The Taiwan Evaluation Association conducted a differential analysis of the actual scores and the expected scores for school resources, including aspects such as “clear information on part-time jobs and scholarships,” as shown on the next page.

The analysis of satisfaction expectations is not part of a satisfaction survey. This can be considered for future institutional research at our school.

Reference: 2018.11, Zhong Hao-Xuan, Evaluation Bi-Monthly, Issue 76.